Chabad Principals Ask Women For “Modesty”
Principals of all the Chabad schools in the Chabad’s Crown Heights,
Brooklyn neighborhood joined together to send out a letter attacking
what they claim is a decline of modesty standards by Chabad women and
girls.
Chabad Principals Ask Women For “Modesty”
Shmarya Rosenberg • FailedMessiah.com
The Chabad news blog COLlive reports that principals of all the Chabad schools in the Chabad’s Crown Heights, Brooklyn neighborhood joined together to send out a letter attacking what they claim is a decline of modesty standards by Chabad women and girls.
The letter reminded the neighborhood’s “esteemed mothers" of their "powerful responsibility of being the [modesty] role model" for their families.
It was signed by Rabbs Hershel Lustig of Oholei Torah, Yosef Simpson of Lubavitcher Yeshiva, Leibel Newman of Bais Rivka, Moti Gurary of Bnos Menachem, Levi Plotkin of Beis Chaya Mushka, and Menachem M. Yusewitz of Ohr Menachem.
“[We] cannot ignore the alarming decline of Tznius standards in our community…our most potent weapon in battle is always achdus [unity], and so our schools have joined together with the objective of strengthening kedushas yisroel [the holiness of the Jewish people],” the letter reportedly noted.
COLlive notes that the majority of Chabad schools in Crown Heights do not have a policy in place that blocks them from accepting students whose parents do not adhere to Chabad’s understanding of the laws of female modesty.
Many haredi schools in Brooklyn, Rockland and Orange Counties, Great Britain and Israel have policies in place that govern parents' dress, television usage and Internet usage, and children are sometimes expelled from school due violations of those policies by one or both of their parents.





Perhaps they should send out a letter asking for the community to practicing idolatry which is personified in the unholy memory of MM Schneersohn.
Posted by: R. Wisler | November 15, 2012 at 09:10 AM
Principals of all the Chabad schools in the Chabad’s Crown Heights, Brooklyn neighborhood joined together to send out a letter attacking what they claim is a decline of modesty standards by Chabad women and girls.
Good to see that they are on the ball. Best to nip a problem in the bud before it gets out of hand.
Posted by: Moshe | November 15, 2012 at 09:14 AM
It's not just Chabad that is doing this:
http://www.startribune.com/local/west/179141451.html?refer=y
Posted by: Lubavitchers are Christians | November 15, 2012 at 09:29 AM
It's not just Chabad that is doing this:
http://www.startribune.com/local/west/179141451.html?refer=y
Posted by: Lubavitchers are Christians | November 15, 2012 at 09:29 AM
Minnetonka principal’s plea: 'Cover your butts up'
Not fair, I want to see more butts! This is America and one should not interfere with ones freedom of expression.
Posted by: Joel | November 15, 2012 at 10:31 AM
Posted by: Lubavitchers are Christians
That link was about non-Jews who need it because they dress provocatively, but for the Jewish community I think it is more ridiculous. The problem is toes,elbows and knees need to be covered up so they won't drive men into a sexual frenzy. Quite ridiculous to me.
Posted by: Ari Gold | November 15, 2012 at 11:53 AM
Yeah cover those skanks up - its the boys they wanna diddle.
Posted by: Henry | November 15, 2012 at 11:56 AM
Minnetonka principal’s plea: 'Cover your butts up'
...
From Forest Lake to St. Paul, more than 70 parents and other high schools called or e-mailed Adney supporting his message, which didn't ban leggings, but urges teens to dress more modestly.
The "M" word from goyim in St. Paul? I thought only the haredim are into modesty.
Shmarya, this school is in your neck of the woods, how about checking out the "exposed butts" situation and reporting back to us, with pictures and videos :)
Posted by: Ari | November 15, 2012 at 12:03 PM
That link was about non-Jews who need it because they dress provocatively, but for the Jewish community I think it is more ridiculous. The problem is toes,elbows and knees need to be covered up so they won't drive men into a sexual frenzy. Quite ridiculous to me.
Posted by: Ari Gold | November 15, 2012 at 11:53 AM
The Jews are always wrong. Don't you get it?
Listen, modesty is a nice thing, and we have no problem with non-Jews asking girls to cover their butts, because they may distract the men.
But if the Jews do it, that means they're just racists and bigots, and sexists. Its because they hate women. Its because they're pedophiles who get turned on from girls' butts or elbows.
The Jews are the worst of the worst. Don't you get it?
(It's the same Jews who are massacring innocent women and children in Gaza as we speak. The fact that the Gazans are rocketing the Jews for the past few months is also the Jews' fault. It's all their fault.)
*Hypocrisy alert*
Posted by: Lubavitchers are Christians | November 15, 2012 at 12:19 PM
What the article said is that Rabbis are reminding people who follow their hashkafa to follow it correctly. In addition that Chabad never turns people away. Especially now with our brothers and sisters in harms way from people who could care less how Modest they dress it is not time to criticize or have back handed compliments. 3 Chabadnics were killed today by Hamas, maybe a nice article about them. I like a lot of people have difficulties with Chareidi leadership/politics, but now I don't really care.
Posted by: Jason Goldstein | November 15, 2012 at 12:26 PM
modesty for chabad girls ? you must be kidding . bais rivka girls and chabad girls are sluts . they date non chabad
guys behind the back of their parents .....
.......and more ........
those ravs from crown heights don't know what's going on ...... they have no clue .
Posted by: dd | November 15, 2012 at 02:07 PM
Posted by: Lubavitchers are Christians | November 15, 2012 at 12:19 PM
How can you compare a request to cover exposed butts to the Hasidic definition of modesty? Hassidim often require women to cover their clavicles, elbows and calves; and to avoid laughing out loud or even swinging their arms when they walk!
Posted by: SkepticalYid | November 15, 2012 at 02:16 PM
Ah, Lubavitchers are Christians, there you are, all over this thread. So where is the apology you owe Nate Silver and me, when you told me that I wouldn't be man enough to apologize to you the day after the election, but that you would be man enough to issue an apology if you were proved wrong? Turns out, of course, that Nate Silver and I were 100% right, and that you and your reality-challenged right-wing sources were completely, embarrassingly wrong and that they (and perhaps you) actually believed their own meshugass. So show me your manhood and apologize. Otherwise I will be forced to conclude that your manhood is as absent as mine.
Posted by: MM | November 15, 2012 at 02:39 PM
How can you compare a request to cover exposed butts to the Hasidic definition of modesty? Hassidim often require women to cover their clavicles, elbows and calves; and to avoid laughing out loud or even swinging their arms when they walk!
Posted by: SkepticalYid | November 15, 2012 at 02:16 PM
My point wasn't to compare. If you go back and read Shmarya's article, he doesn't mention anything about laughing out loud or swinging their arms when they walk. In fact, Shmarya didn't give any examples of the modesty standards that are required by Chabad.
The jist of Shmarya's article was to somehow show Chabad in a negative light simply because the schools are asking their students to adhere to modesty rules.
And lo and behold, a non-Jewish principal in Minnesota is also asking students to adhere to modesty.
Now, are there differences in modesty levels? Of course! But once we can all agree that there is a valid moral purpose to modesty, and asking girls to dress without provocation, I don't see the problem with some cultures asking for less standards of modesty and other cultures asking for higher levels of modesty.
And this is coming from someone who never fails to bash Lubavitchers, according to our good friend Jeff.
Posted by: Lubavitchers are Christians | November 15, 2012 at 02:44 PM
modesty for chabad girls ? you must be kidding . bais rivka girls and chabad girls are sluts . they date non chabad
guys behind the back of their parents .....
.......and more ........
Posted by: dd
How do you know this my friend?
Posted by: Ari Gold | November 15, 2012 at 03:38 PM
Nu, LAC, you respond at once to Skeptical Yid, but you still do not apologize as you promised me. You refuse to admit that you were beguiled by the wily Fox, unable or refusing to weigh available evidence and think for yourself. You, therefore, force me to conclude that you are indeed a sore loser, bereft of certain important body parts, both above the neck and below the waist..
Posted by: MM | November 15, 2012 at 04:17 PM
Posted by: MM | November 15, 2012 at 04:17 PM
A perfectly logical conclusion on your part. Any man who considers restricting women's freedom of expression to the point where they can't walk normally to be an acceptable cultural norm is a lacking certain body parts.
Posted by: SkepticalYid | November 15, 2012 at 06:41 PM
Skeptical Yid, perhaps LAC, under the mistaken impression that I was male when he made his promise to apologize if proven wrong, now feels that he needn't lower himself to apologize to a female who has no business making public comments on politics or anything else, or perhaps he is too mortified to admit that he was so gullible as to believe the Foxies when concrete evidence to the contrary was readily available. or perhaps he's just a jerk.
Posted by: MM | November 15, 2012 at 06:57 PM
Posted by: MM | November 15, 2012 at 06:57 PM
I lean towards your last supposition. However there is considerable evidence to support the belief that those who tend to "Conservative" political or social viewpoints become more entrenched in their opinions when presented with facts that invalidate their conclusions.
Posted by: SkepticalYid | November 15, 2012 at 07:40 PM
I think they are both wrong. What wrong with seeing a nicely formed butt. I personally enjoy it! I don't get all the uproar. Just like art or nature is pleasant to look at, a nice butt is also! Are they gonna ban art next?
Posted by: Jake24 | November 16, 2012 at 11:17 AM
Yes, it is important to cover up god's not-so-successful first try.
Thank god he did not make me a woman - is still prayed by jewish men every morning.
It would have been interesting if god made women bigger and stronger than men.
Posted by: BeenThereDoneThat | November 16, 2012 at 01:47 PM
Can someone tell me what is modest about dressing in a way that draws attention to yourself? That is exactly what hasidic dress codes do, although the point may be too subtle for the hasidic mind.
Posted by: SML | November 17, 2012 at 04:05 PM
Funny, when I once put in a request for Modesty at Torah Classes in the Chabad, I got kicked out of the lovely chabad. Nice people. G-dless priorities.
Posted by: westernjew | November 18, 2012 at 05:19 AM
LAC, oh come on...you told me as well that Silver was wrong and that you would be vindicated by a Romney "landslide".
You gonna sulk about this for four more years?
Posted by: Eli, what me messiah? | November 18, 2012 at 02:42 PM
Unfortunately many Chabad woman look more like secular girls than how religous females dress and behave. The opposite of looking 'sexy' is to look Tzinius. Well in Crown heights there is a fashion store run by to Chabad sisters who promote their clothing to be sexy and chassidish. Next they will have Glatt pork!
Posted by: Another | November 19, 2012 at 07:16 AM
What interests me ias that the principals are men. Here in London, most Jewish girls schools have female headteachers. Women should be advising women. When I taught in one Haredi boys school, strangely with a female headteacher,I had to sign an agreement not to wear short skirts or a long shaitel -- and to this day I have worn neither! I was also asked -- after eight years in the job -- to sign that I have no access to t.v. or internet. When I refused to sign and the school refused to pay my salary, my union's legal dept sorted it out. Curiously the non-Jewish male teachers were not asked to sign either agreement.
Posted by: Joseph | February 16, 2013 at 06:30 PM